An Investigation of Flow Theory in an Online Game

Pub Date : 2020-12-09 DOI:10.1561/105.00000127
Dan Acland
{"title":"An Investigation of Flow Theory in an Online Game","authors":"Dan Acland","doi":"10.1561/105.00000127","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Flow Theory posits that motivation is highest when individuals experience above average challenges and perform at above average skill. I use data from a short, repetitive online game to test this hypothesis and to explore the role of Flow Theory in motivation and game play. I also explore the relationship between Flow Theory and demand for commitment. For each player, the Flow-Theory channel in which they are most likely to continue playing the game is identified, and players are categorized into types accordingly. Control, Boredom and Relaxation types are most common. Flow types are among the least common, making up 12.6% of players. Flow types have the lowest skill level, but challenge themselves the most, and are most likely to make use of self-control devices available within the game. Control types play most frequently and over a longer period of weeks. Apathy types are high skill but seek out low challenges and are least likely to make use of self-control devices. Flow and control types are more likely to play during the workday. Relaxation, boredom and apathy types are more likely to play during workday evenings. I conclude that the principle hypothesis of Flow Theory does not explain my findings, but other aspects of Flow Theory are relevant to an understanding of motivation and self-control.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1561/105.00000127","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Flow Theory posits that motivation is highest when individuals experience above average challenges and perform at above average skill. I use data from a short, repetitive online game to test this hypothesis and to explore the role of Flow Theory in motivation and game play. I also explore the relationship between Flow Theory and demand for commitment. For each player, the Flow-Theory channel in which they are most likely to continue playing the game is identified, and players are categorized into types accordingly. Control, Boredom and Relaxation types are most common. Flow types are among the least common, making up 12.6% of players. Flow types have the lowest skill level, but challenge themselves the most, and are most likely to make use of self-control devices available within the game. Control types play most frequently and over a longer period of weeks. Apathy types are high skill but seek out low challenges and are least likely to make use of self-control devices. Flow and control types are more likely to play during the workday. Relaxation, boredom and apathy types are more likely to play during workday evenings. I conclude that the principle hypothesis of Flow Theory does not explain my findings, but other aspects of Flow Theory are relevant to an understanding of motivation and self-control.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
流理论在网络游戏中的应用研究
心流理论认为,当个人经历高于平均水平的挑战并表现出高于平均水平的技能时,动机是最高的。我使用一款简短且重复的在线游戏的数据来验证这一假设,并探索心流理论在动机和游戏玩法中的作用。我还探讨了心流理论与承诺需求之间的关系。对于每个玩家来说,他们最有可能继续玩游戏的流理论渠道被确定,玩家被相应地分类。控制型、无聊型和放松型是最常见的。心流类型是最不常见的类型,仅占12.6%的玩家。心流类型玩家的技能水平最低,但挑战自己的能力最大,并且最有可能利用游戏中的自我控制设备。控制型玩家玩得最频繁,持续时间也更长。冷漠型的人技能高,但不喜欢挑战,不太可能使用自我控制工具。心流型和控制型更有可能在工作日发挥作用。放松型、无聊型和冷漠型的人更有可能在工作日的晚上玩耍。我的结论是,心流理论的主要假设并不能解释我的发现,但心流理论的其他方面与理解动机和自我控制有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1